CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. 2024-02870
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 18, 2026

Samuel v. Petainer

Ori Samuel sustained personal injuries when a kombucha keg exploded at a storage facility. Samuel, a brand ambassador for GT's Living Foods, LLC (GTLF), received workers' compensation benefits through Atrium Payroll Services, LLC, which was GTLF's "employer of record." Samuel filed a personal injury action against multiple defendants, including GTLF. GTLF moved for summary judgment, asserting that it was Samuel's special employer, thus limiting its liability under the Workers' Compensation Law, and that Samuel did not suffer a "grave injury." The Supreme Court denied GTLF's motion. On appeal, the Appellate Division modified the order, finding that GTLF successfully established its prima facie case as a special employer and that no grave injury occurred, thereby granting summary judgment to GTLF on the amended complaint and all cross-claims for contribution and common-law indemnification.

Personal InjurySpecial EmploymentWorkers' CompensationSummary JudgmentAppellate DivisionEmployer LiabilityContributionIndemnificationKombucha ExplosionBrand Ambassador
References
12
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 05, 1999

Wallengren v. Samuel French, Inc.

The plaintiff, Henry M. Wallengren, sued his employer, Samuel French, Inc., and its president, Charles Van Nostrand, alleging wrongful termination based on his AIDS condition, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the New York State Human Rights Law (NYSHRL). Wallengren claimed that after disclosing his AIDS diagnosis, Van Nostrand's behavior became subtly discriminatory, culminating in his termination. Defendants moved for summary judgment, asserting Wallengren was fired for disloyalty due to his efforts to establish a competing non-musical play division with another company. The court denied the defendants' motion, concluding that Wallengren had presented a prima facie case of discrimination, including direct comments from Van Nostrand implying discriminatory animus. A genuine issue of material fact remains concerning whether the defendants' stated reason for termination was a pretext for disability discrimination, requiring a jury's determination of credibility.

Employment DiscriminationDisability DiscriminationAIDS DiscriminationADA ViolationNYSHRL ViolationWrongful TerminationSummary Judgment MotionPretext EvidencePrima Facie CaseDiscriminatory Intent
References
28
Case No. 532397
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 06, 2022

In the Matter of the Claim of Samuel McElroy

The claimant, Samuel McElroy, a public safety officer, filed a workers' compensation claim for a right foot/ankle injury sustained on May 3, 2019. He provided notice to his employer on June 17, 2019, which was 15 days beyond the 30-day statutory period required by Workers' Compensation Law § 18. The Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) and subsequently the Workers' Compensation Board established the claim, excusing the late notice on the grounds that the employer was not prejudiced by the delay. The employer and carrier appealed, contending that the claimant failed to demonstrate lack of prejudice. The Appellate Division affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence that the short delay did not prevent the employer from properly investigating the claim.

Workers' CompensationNotice of InjuryTimeliness of NoticeEmployer PrejudiceIndependent Medical ExaminationAppellate DivisionAdministrative AppealPublic Safety OfficerFoot InjuryAnkle Injury
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Samuels v. City of New York

Plaintiff Melanie Samuels sued the City of New York for personal injuries after falling into a pothole. A jury initially found the City 65% liable and Samuels 35% liable. The lower court set aside this verdict, finding the City 100% liable, and ordered a new trial for damages. The appellate court reversed the lower court's decision, reinstating the original jury's liability apportionment. The case is remanded for a new trial on damages, with a stipulation for the plaintiff to reduce specific awards if she wishes to avoid a full retrial on damages. The court found sufficient evidence to support the jury's finding that the City affirmatively created the defect.

Personal InjuryPothole AccidentMunicipal LiabilityComparative NegligenceJury VerdictDamagesNew TrialAppellate ReviewAffirmative NegligencePrior Written Notice
References
33
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Samuel DD.

Respondent appealed a Family Court order from Albany County, entered April 20, 2010, which adjudicated her child, Samuel DD., neglected under Family Ct Act article 10. The neglect finding stemmed from respondent's failure to provide necessary medical treatment for the child's severe behavioral and mental health issues, including ADHD and suspected bipolar disorder, along with educational neglect and respondent’s own mental health problems. The child exhibited extreme and dangerous behaviors at school, leading to his dismissal. Despite medical recommendations for medication and psychiatric evaluation, the respondent refused to administer treatment, attend follow-up appointments, or cooperate with service plans. The appellate court affirmed the neglect finding, concluding that the record provided ample evidence of respondent's unreasonable failure to exercise a minimum degree of care in providing for the child's welfare.

Child NeglectFamily Court ActParental RightsMedical Treatment RefusalChild Mental HealthADHDBehavioral IssuesEducational NeglectAppellate ReviewParental Care Standards
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Friedar v. Government of Israel

Samuel Friedar, a New York citizen, sued the Government of Israel and its branches for failing to compensate him for medical costs and expenses incurred after being injured while serving in the Israeli Army in 1948. Friedar alleged breach of contract, intentional withholding of information, negligent loss of files, and wrongful conversion of funds. The Government moved to dismiss, claiming sovereign immunity under 28 U.S.C. § 1604 and that the action was barred by the Act of State doctrine. The Court found that the Government was entitled to sovereign immunity, rejecting Friedar's arguments for exceptions based on waiver or commercial activity. Furthermore, even if jurisdiction existed, the Court would dismiss the case under the Act of State doctrine, citing the impropriety of reviewing a foreign state's internal administrative activity, especially regarding military and veterans' benefits. The Government’s motion to dismiss was granted.

Sovereign ImmunityAct of State DoctrineMotion to DismissForeign Sovereign Immunities ActFSIAGovernmental ImmunityCommercial Activity ExceptionVeterans' BenefitsJurisdictionInternational Law
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Rimoldi v. Schanzer

Justice Thompson concurs in part and dissents in part with the majority decision concerning the defendant homeowners, Samuel and Adrianne Millman. He agrees with the dismissal of statutory claims against the Millmans under Workers' Compensation Law § 11, the Occupational Safety and Health Act, and Education Law § 3215 (1), as the plaintiffs' decedents were not deemed employees. Additionally, he concurs with dismissing the punitive damages claims due to a lack of evidence of gross, wanton, or willful conduct. However, Justice Thompson dissents regarding claims under Labor Law §§ 200, 240, and 241, asserting that the Millmans did not exercise sufficient direction and control over the swimming pool construction to incur absolute liability. He concludes that the Millmans' involvement was limited to aspects like location and appearance, not the methods of work, and therefore, all claims against them should be dismissed.

Homeowner LiabilityLabor Law ViolationsConstruction AccidentsSummary JudgmentDissenting OpinionStatutory InterpretationDirection and ControlWorkers' CompensationOccupational SafetyPunitive Damages
References
19
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Di Nicola v. Crucible Steel, Inc.

Claimant Samuel Di Nicola became disabled from obstructive pulmonary disease, an occupational disease, as a result of his 11-year employment by the self-insured employer, Crucible Steel. He worked in conditions with poor ventilation and significant dust, leading to respiratory complaints that began in 1971. Medical experts, Dr. Enders and Dr. Sipple, diagnosed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease aggravated by industrial exposure, while Dr. Miller, initially skeptical, conceded a possible work-related link. The employer appealed the Workers’ Compensation Board's finding of occupational disease and continuing disability, arguing it was contrary to case law. The court affirmed the board's decision, finding its classification consistent with prior rulings and supported by substantial medical evidence that the work environment aggravated claimant's pre-existing bronchitis and asthma.

Occupational DiseasePulmonary DiseaseChronic Obstructive Pulmonary DiseaseIndustrial ExposureDust ExposureBronchitisAsthmaWorkers' CompensationMedical EvidenceDisability
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Song v. Ives Laboratories, Inc.

Dr. Samuel Song was terminated by Ives Laboratories, Inc., leading him to file a discrimination charge with the EEOC, which was referred to the SDHR. The SDHR dismissed his complaint for administrative convenience. Song subsequently sued, alleging national origin discrimination under federal civil rights acts and the New York State Human Rights Law. The defendant moved for partial summary judgment, seeking to dismiss the Section 1981 claim and the state law claim. The court granted dismissal of the Section 1981 claim, applying the precedent of Patterson v. McLean Credit Union retroactively. However, the court denied the dismissal of the Human Rights Law claim, affirming that an administrative convenience dismissal by the SDHR preserves the right to sue and that exercising pendent jurisdiction was appropriate.

Employment DiscriminationNational Origin DiscriminationCivil Rights Act of 1866Title VII Civil Rights Act of 1964New York State Human Rights LawRetroactive Application of LawPendent JurisdictionElection of RemediesAdministrative Convenience DismissalSummary Judgment
References
40
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Patterson v. Xerox Corporation

Plaintiff Vanessa Patterson sued Xerox Corporation and Samuel Peterson, alleging discrimination based on national origin, race, and gender, hostile work environment, and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the New York State Human Rights Law. She also included common law claims for negligent supervision and retention. Defendants moved to dismiss all claims. The court granted dismissal of Title VII claims against Peterson due to his status as a co-employee, and all common law negligence claims against both defendants, citing the exclusivity of the New York Worker's Compensation Law. However, the court denied dismissal of hostile work environment and retaliation claims against Xerox under Title VII, and against both Xerox and Peterson under the New York State Human Rights Law, finding them plausible and reasonably related to her EEOC charge.

DiscriminationRetaliationHostile Work EnvironmentTitle VIINew York Human Rights LawMotion to DismissEEOC ExhaustionIndividual LiabilityNegligent SupervisionWorker's Compensation Exclusivity
References
44
Showing 1-10 of 93 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational